This site doesn't concern family genealogies, only royal genealogies.
The evidence suggests that only two of the Gospel figures produced enduring Roman royal lines, namely John the Baptist and Jesus. The line of Jesus took the throne (in the person of Nerva), but then yielded to that of John (in the persons of Trajan and Hadrian). Then other descendants of Nerva recovered the throne for many generations. It is not clear whether the line of John also provided any further Roman emperors.
A daughter of Paul could have contributed to the royal lines of either Jesus or John, but Paul's male line does not itself seem to have retained any kingships/dynasties, at least in Rome. This does not mean that Paul did not have sons and many, many descendants that are living today.
An example of this in the Old Testament would be the Rechabites descended from Jehonadab/Elisha (King Tut). The royal line of Tut did not go on, but he was considered the ancestor (through one or more minor wives/concubines) of a significant group, the Rechabites, who were apparently unique in their lifestyle. They were a sort of ancient Mormans, if you will!
According to the genealogies provided by Sir Laurence Gardner, there were at least two other male lines (besides Jesus) that endured in Britain and Europe in general. Bran/Bron "the Blessed" was the ancestor of one line, and Arviragus of Siluria (brother of Caractus the Pendragon) through his son Marius (by the daughter of Emperor Claudius) was ancestor of another. Bran married a daughter of Joseph of Arimathea (who I identify as Herod Antipas).
I'm quite certain that Bran, Arviragus, and Marius are members of the Herodian/Roman royal family and therefore associated with leading Gospel figures. For example, Bran or Arviragus may have actually been a Celtic alias of Paul (Simon Magus/Lazarus).
Something to think about and research!
DomainOfMan-o-Man Genealogy Dept.
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.